masseffectfandomcom-20200222-history
Category talk:Mass Effect 2 Consequences
Deletion Supporting deletion. This isn't necessary and could go into the Mass Effect 2 article if we need it. Also, the name of the category is misleading; it sounds like it refers to the consequences of Mass Effect 2, not the consequences that carry over into ME2 from the original game. --Tullis 03:17, February 27, 2010 (UTC) . I'm a random guy passing through, but I would like to say that this page was a bit of a godsend for me; a page that will list things which carry over to ME2. Expanding it is a decent idea, IMO. 08:39, February 28, 2010 (UTC) :Casting a vote in favor of deletion. As Tullis said, the title leaves something to be desired, and this info could just as easily be compiled in an article somewhere, rather than in a category. SpartHawg948 08:41, February 28, 2010 (UTC) I think the category makes sense, though the name needs to change. There are a whole lot of consequences in ME2 based on what choices were made in ME1, if you tried to list everything in an article even if you were just trying to summarize it would be quite long. In any case I don't think any such article exists and one should be created before we start talking about deleting this category Raitchison 17:20, March 1, 2010 (UTC) :The article exist: Save File Transfer. The category is misleading both in name and content. --silverstrike 06:41, March 3, 2010 (UTC) I'd say leave it because it's more-or-less spolier free. I'm for keeping it and not deleting. If it had been an article rather than a category I might never have found it. Finding it as a category for ME1 missions that had impact on the second game was by chance, and was highly useful. : I believe we should either change the title of the catagory or it into seperate article like SpartHawg948 said.--UNCxTrinity 03:39, March 11, 2010 (UTC) I am against deletion (I still haven't registered, but I will soon.) 09:25, March 16, 2010 (UTC) :You don't have to register to have an opinion on the matter. I actually think that keeping that category only contribute to confuse rather then clarify. If the final word is for the category to stay, then all ME articles that have any consequences in ME2 will be categorized in this category, and seeing as most decisions in ME have some kind of continuity, it will be harder to distinguish what decisions carry any kind of importance. An article could make the distinction much better. --silverstrike 13:57, March 16, 2010 (UTC) I say leave it. Having a place to link to all the consequences of decisions made in ME1 and how they apply to ME2 is a phenomenal idea. I do agree that the title may be misleading though. Maybe something like "Mass Effect Consequences for Mass Effect 2" or some such thing. Maybe a more succinct title than what I suggested hopefully. Hefe 16:15, May 5, 2010 (UTC) Since it appears this discussion has not been concluded, I support deletion per the arguments above. We already have a list of consequences at Save File Transfer to boot. -- Commdor (Talk) 17:59, May 5, 2010 (UTC) :I also support deletion. The list on the save file transfer page is enough without adding a useless category to the bottom of a lot of pages. I didn't realize this discussion was incomplete, and that doesn't give anyone the right to add it to other pages because it is still in discussion. Lancer1289 18:05, May 5, 2010 (UTC) Begging your pardon, but I don't see how it's a "useless category" if this is still in discussion. Additionally, unless this category gets deleted, who gives a rip if the category is listed at the bottom? Most people don't even look at the categories. The Save File Transfer page is nice and all but this category is easier on the eyes. If this format is kept, you can just look at the missions, assignments, characters, etc. and read up on it. All the other page does is force you to scan the page to find where whatever you're looking for is mentioned. One example of things being missed is Citadel: Snap Inspection assignment. It's not recorded, however, "If completed successfully, in Mass Effect 2 a news segment will make references to another Normandy-class vessel. Retrieved from "http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Citadel:_Snap_Inspection". All I'm saying is a quick link to the actual page saves missing small things like that or searching all over the Save File Transfer page to find it. But, in the end, I'm a lone voice in the darkness that is the internet...Hefe 18:37, May 5, 2010 (UTC) :If the category gets deleted, then we'll have to go and remove it from every page it was on. If you keep adding the category to other articles, then that's more work to do. It's much easier for everyone to wait for a decision on this and act from there. And that example you gave isn't the best one, the discussion on Snap Inspection's talk page seems to say that the news segment's appearance isn't tied into the assignment. -- Commdor (Talk) 19:05, May 5, 2010 (UTC) ::Fair enough but how long does this discussion have to go on for before it's resolved? It's going on 4 months and I was the first one to post in 2. Either get rid of it or don't so that it can be used as a category or not. Apologies for the tone, but I don't appreciate my changes being undone. I figured if 2 months later the category was still here that it was here to stay. Hefe 19:35, May 5, 2010 (UTC) :::Actually you'd be surprised on how long some of these conversations go on. I know of one article that was up for deletion and had a discussion on the talk page for about a month. Then it was forgotten about for another 2 until I can across it and then was deleted about a month after that. So the fact that this discussion was gone on this long isn't surprising. Lancer1289 19:38, May 5, 2010 (UTC) ::::Well, seeing as how we are the only ones that gave a rip in the last 2 months, I say we should just get rid of it. If I can't link to it without having it undone, it might as well just go away. And the Citadel: Snap Inspection page should have the ME2 reference removed if it isn't tied in... Hefe 19:41, May 5, 2010 (UTC) Against deletion. The "Save File Transfer" page is good and all, but it's hard to cherrypick specific quests to see their consequences in ME2 without seeing ones you don't want to see. Like how the huge spoiler consequences of ME1(Wrex, the Council, Ashley/Kaidan) are at the top glaring you down before you can even scroll down to the little ME1 assignments from the start of the game. That's no good for someone who bought ME1 and ME2 at the same time with the intent of carrying over to ME2 as soon as he beats ME1. For someone like that, a category of all the quests that carry over, and their consequences listed in the articles themselves, is much more friendly. Plus "Save File Transfer" doesn't list in detail which choices on the assignments leads to what in ME2. So I'd recommend either renamining this category or reformatting "Save File Transfer" to be more spoiler-friendly like this category. Either way, I like the spoiler-free style of this category, and would like for it to remain in some form. RogueJedi86 16:32, May 7, 2010 (UTC) Well, this one is a bit confusing. People not signing posts and such makes tabulating difficult, but if I read this correctly, the total is (close one here) 6-5 in favor of deletion. So again, I'll leave this for a bit (probably a few hours to a day or so) and then delete. SpartHawg948 04:05, May 16, 2010 (UTC) This page is probably the Most Useful I have found since I just now started Mass Effect 1 for the 1st time but had already played through Mass Effect 2. If It is deleted I will be sure to have a backup ready to be uploaded to a different website... 13:46, May 21, 2010 (UTC)DJ 13:46, May 21, 2010 (UTC) "I think this page should be deleted and a re-direct page for the consequences made to link to Save Transfer File. Categories are for organisation, not game guides, and Save Transfer File is the game guide everyone is wanting." 23:40, May 23, 2010 (UTC) This page is fantastic for anyone who wants to beat ME quickly in order to have their character carry over into ME2. Even though I already beat it, it was with another account on another console, and I know there are memory cards but the account thing still will bother me, especially since it is used s much. This is perfect for us who want the same experience but not to spend weeks beating the game (especially if one has a full-time job). I believe that there were about 700 choices that carried over to Mass Effect 2 from Mass Effect, and (unconfirmed) I'm pretty sure that about 2000 choices are going to carry over to ME3 from the two previous games. Darpod016 16:50, May 31, 2010 (UTC) Well after much debate, lasting for several months, the current vote count sits at 9-8, so looks like the community has decided that this category should stay, so the delete tag is coming down. Lancer1289 04:42, July 6, 2010 (UTC) Sorry for coming in late into the discussion. I felt this category is a misnomer, (probably it should be called "Mass Effect Consequences/Outcomes" — and not ME2), so I'm in favour of a deletion, or a rename at least. Teugene 06:38, July 6, 2010 (UTC) After reading through the discussion and checking out the category, I have decided that I support the delete. I don't know if that matters anymore, but there you have it. Arbington 06:43, July 6, 2010 (UTC) And the tables turn again, with the new votes it is 10-9 in favor of deletion, so I will readd the delete tag, and we will see what develops over the next 7 days. Lancer1289 06:48, July 6, 2010 (UTC) :Oops that is 9-9, I can't tell where Darpod016 stands, so I'll have to ask him to clarify. Lancer1289 06:52, July 6, 2010 (UTC) ::To elaborate a little on my vote, I find the category is useful but the name misleading. So if it gets deleted, it should be replaced with "Mass Effect consequences", or probably to rename it rather recreating a new page. Teugene 07:12, July 6, 2010 (UTC) The lack of parliamentary procedure here irks me :) I'd hate to imagine how little would get done if votes were always allowed to continue arbitrarily. Isn't there some sort of timeline about how long discussion/voting should be open for deleting an article? Leaving the discussion open for months on end could happen, I suppose. But the votes were tallied at the end of this period. Is it kosher to just reopen discussion again because a couple of people that were late to the party have opinions now? (doomsayer mode:) What if the outcome was "yeah lets delete this" and then 3 people came up right after deletion and said "no wait please keep it I didn't vote!" The answer would likely be "too bad." Why should this discussion be any different? I'm not suggesting we never be allowed to have a discussion again once it's over... I'm just suggesting there be a refractory period, during which any more decisions can't be made, or votes brought up again. This would prevent late-comers from suddenly joining the discussion immediately after a decision has been made, intending to change the outcome after the fact. Perhaps I'm blowing a problem out of proportion (I do that a lot), but I think there should be some sort of official word on how long votes are allowed to be tallied for these sorts of important decisions, and how long before the same vote can be brought up again. Thanks for reading. :P Dammej 07:21, July 6, 2010 (UTC) :Usually the time limit is 7 days, but this one slipped through the cracks for months without a new discussion the old one was continued. Yes usually the procedure is too late, then oh well, but the inital discussion was continued, and this one had wide reaching consequences, so every vote counts. However I'll start up a new discussion to seperate this one, and we'll see what happens after 7 days. Lancer1289 07:35, July 6, 2010 (UTC) ::I'm ok with another discussion here in principle. Since the last discussion on this was on May 31st, it's been over a month. I would imagine that a month is ample time to let things lie before attempting to open another discussion. The reason I brought this up, however, is for the future. After this current discussion ends in 7 days, how long is that decision binding? Is it just a day before someone can bring up a vote again? A month? 3 months? I don't think this is anywhere in the manual of style... or whatever document might cover this administrative headache. I just want the precedent to be set so that we know for the future. Perhaps there is a page that's more appropriate for this discussion? (Or does it not matter what I think, and admins would set this sort of policy? :P) Dammej 07:42, July 6, 2010 (UTC) :::I think we need to move this discussion to the Style Guide's talk page. That seems to be the best place for this discussion that I can think of. Lancer1289 07:52, July 6, 2010 (UTC) Deletion Again Since the issue has come up again a new discussion is needed to decide again if this category should stay or go. And after being reminded of the "too late to the discussion" policy, a new thread was needed for a revote. Personally I vote to delete. Lancer1289 07:37, July 6, 2010 (UTC) :Indeed, to me deletion seems best. Arbington 07:46, July 6, 2010 (UTC) :Yes. This catagory that is on the proposed articles does not really specify any particular consequence. Thats what the bloody article is for! So I vote for deletion. MEffect Fan 07:49, July 6, 2010 (UTC) :I vote for deletion, doesn't seem necessary. JakePT 08:45, July 6, 2010 (UTC) ::I cast my vote for deletion once more. -- Commdor (Talk) 16:56, July 6, 2010 (UTC) :::Delete! Teugene 03:12, July 8, 2010 (UTC) ::::Delete! (this is actually a vote for deletion despite the semi-ironic use of the video)Bastian964 19:58, July 8, 2010 (UTC) :::::Nice video, that just game the the laugh I needed today. :) Lancer1289 20:02, July 8, 2010 (UTC) Leave it be, I'm for deletion. Although it is nice to have everything in one place, it is not neccessary. The information on decisions that carry over can be found easily enough already without the use of this category. Darpod016 21:05, July 9, 2010 (UTC) It's Decision Day... Well after a long discussion lasting back into February, the day has finally arrived on whether or not this category will survive. I have been very careful about talling the votes, and said votes are in. The final vote from the whole discussion page is, 13-10, in the second discussion, 8-1, in favor of deletion. So, becuase the community has decided that this cateogry is unnecessary, it is going. Lancer1289 05:03, July 13, 2010 (UTC)